'If A VIP's Son Was Kidnapped, Would CBI Have Given Such a Plain Reply?' Father Whose Son Is Untraceable For 3 Years Appeals To Supreme Court

The petitioner father along with his wife could be seen pleading before the top Court with folded hands during the virtual hearing.

"The petitioner parents are at feet of the ultimate protector, the parents are very ordinary persons at mercy of authorities." the petitioner father said.

Before a Division Bench comprising Justice UU Lalit and Justice Ajay Rastogi, the petitioner father submitted that even after 3 years of his son being kidnapped, he is still untraceable.

'Koi VIP ka ladka kidnap hota CBI ka itna plain reply nai aata..'  ( If he was a VIP's son, CBI wouldn't have given such a plain reply)", petitioner in person Mr Ashok Sinha remarked.

Mr Sinha told the Court that his son's case was transferred by Bangalore police to CID Karnataka since the police were busy with Assembly Elections.

"Why did CID Karnataka not develop those leads, CID is not telling us that. We requested CBI to examine CID Karnataka as to where did they waste those clear leads including the sims and cellphone used by suspects." he said.

The father went on to cite the callousness of the investigative agency in the case:

"We are not being told what happened to those leads and why those leads could not be developed? We have been denied information in name of secrecy and confidentiality." 

'Mere bacche ki body hi la k dede toh mei ro lunga, abhi mei na ji sakta hu na mar sakta hu.' (At least get my son's body so I can cry; right now, I can neither live nor die), the father pleaded before the Supreme Court.

Expressing his sympathies towards the petitioner father, Justice UU Lalit stated that the Court understands that as a father of the victim who has been untraceable for 3 years, it must be a tremendous predicament to not know the fate of the investigation, in which way it's progressing and what is its current status.

"The matter was adjourned on last occasion and they have filed 3 status reports. We can see you haven't been given a copy of those reports. As complainant, as the father of victim you aren't even made aware of any development, we quite see that and all our sympathies. We'll definitely put you in touch with the investigation machinery, we will see and do whatever we can and go into the root of everything." Justice UU Lalit said.

After ASG Nataraj submitted that further status report needs to be filed since the matter has been coming up after one year, the Bench observed that the investigating officer must be connected through VC on next date, so the Court could get a version as to what exactly he has done and in how much time will he be able to complete the rest.

The Bench noted that while three status reports have been filed in the instant matter, no concrete conclusion has been arrived at by the investigating officer. The status report further discloses that there are no possible leads and investigation hasn't been able to unearth the reason for and persons behind the disappearance of petitioner's son.

"The Petitioner who appeared in person submitted that initially the investigation was carried by CID Branch of Karnataka police, thereafter the investigation is now being conducted by Central Bureau of Investigation. There were certain leads which were available with CID Branch of Karnataka police. According to the petitioner those leads were not shared with CBI nor was any steps taken as a logical conclusion from the leads which were already available," the Bench noted.

After the petitioner agreed to go to Bangalore and have interactions with the investigating officer, Bench directed him to get in touch with Mr Rohit Shrivastava, the Additional SP from 9th August 2021 and incharge of the investigation.

The Bench has also asked the Officer to make himself available for the purpose of present investigation all throughout the week and explore every single possibility in terms of the leads which were available with CID Branch of Karnataka police.

A Status report has been directed to be filed by concerned official on or before Saturday, and the Officer has been asked to remain connected through VC when the matter is taken up on August 16th.

Case title: Ashok Kumar Sinha vs Union of India